Clinical pharmacist services within intensive care unit recovery clinics: An opinion of the critical care practice and research network of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy

Intensive care unit recovery clinics (ICU- RCs) have been proposed as a potential mechanism to address the multifaceted unmet needs of intensive care unit (ICU) survivors and caregivers. The needs of this population include, but are not limited to, medication optimization, addressing physical function and psychological needs, coordination of care, and other interventions that may help in improving patient recovery and reducing the rate of preventable readmissions. The objective of this opinion paper is to identify and describe clinical pharmacy services for the management of ICU survivors and their caregivers in an ICU- RC. The goals are to guide the establishment and development of clinical pharmacist involvement in ICU- RCs and to highlight ICU recovery research and educational opportunities. Recommendations provided in this paper are based on the following: a review of published data on clinical pharmacist involvement in the ICU- RCs; a consensus of clinical pharmacists who provide direct patient care to ICU survivors and caregivers; and a review of published guidelines and literature focusing on the management of ICU survivors and caregivers. These recommendations define areas of clinical pharmacist involvement in ICU- RCs. Consequently, clinical pharmacists can promote education on Post Intensive Care Syndrome and Post Intensive Care Syndrome- Family; improve medication adherence; facilitate appropriate referrals to primary care providers and specialists; ensure comprehensive medication management and medication reconciliation; provide assessment of inappropriate and appropriate medications after hospitalization; address adverse drug events, medication errors, and drug interactions; promote preventive measures; and facilitate medication acquisition with the goal of improving patient outcomes and reducing health care system costs.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163579/2/jac51311.pdfhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/163579/1/jac51311_am.pd

Key mechanisms by which post-ICU activities can improve in-ICU care: results of the international THRIVE collaboratives

Objective: To identify the key mechanisms that clinicians perceive improve care in the intensive care unit (ICU), as a result of their involvement in post-ICU programs. Methods: Qualitative inquiry via focus groups and interviews with members of the Society of Critical Care Medicine’s THRIVE collaborative sites (follow-up clinics and peer support). Framework analysis was used to synthesize and interpret the data. Results: Five key mechanisms were identified as drivers of improvement back into the ICU: (1) identifying otherwise unseen targets for ICU quality improvement or education programs—new ideas for quality improvement were generated and greater attention paid to detail in clinical care. (2) Creating a new role for survivors in the ICU—former patients and family members adopted an advocacy or peer volunteer role. (3) Inviting critical care providers to the post-ICU program to educate, sensitize, and motivate them—clinician peers and trainees were invited to attend as a helpful learning strategy to gain insights into post-ICU care requirements. (4) Changing clinician’s own understanding of patient experience—there appeared to be a direct individual benefit from working in post-ICU programs. (5) Improving morale and meaningfulness of ICU work—this was achieved by closing the feedback loop to ICU clinicians regarding patient and family outcomes. Conclusions: The follow-up of patients and families in post-ICU care settings is perceived to improve care within the ICU via five key mechanisms. Further research is required in this novel area

Enablers and Barriers to Implementing ICU Follow-Up Clinics and Peer Support Groups Following Critical Illness: The Thrive Collaboratives

OBJECTIVES: Data are lacking regarding implementation of novel strategies such as follow-up clinics and peer support groups, to reduce the burden of postintensive care syndrome. We sought to discover enablers that helped hospital-based clinicians establish post-ICU clinics and peer support programs, and identify barriers that challenged them. DESIGN: Qualitative inquiry. The Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research was used to organize and analyze data. SETTING: Two learning collaboratives (ICU follow-up clinics and peer support groups), representing 21 sites, across three continents. SUBJECTS: Clinicians from 21 sites. MEASUREMENT AND MAIN RESULTS: Ten enablers and nine barriers to implementation of "ICU follow-up clinics" were described. A key enabler to generate support for clinics was providing insight into the human experience of survivorship, to obtain interest from hospital administrators. Significant barriers included patient and family lack of access to clinics and clinic funding. Nine enablers and five barriers to the implementation of "peer support groups" were identified. Key enablers included developing infrastructure to support successful operationalization of this complex intervention, flexibility about when peer support should be offered, belonging to the international learning collaborative. Significant barriers related to limited attendance by patients and families due to challenges in creating awareness, and uncertainty about who might be appropriate to attend and target in advertising. CONCLUSIONS: Several enablers and barriers to implementing ICU follow-up clinics and peer support groups should be taken into account and leveraged to improve ICU recovery. Among the most important enablers are motivated clinician leaders who persist to find a path forward despite obstacles

Transition From Intravenous to Subcutaneous Insulin in Critically Ill Adults

BACKGROUND: Glycemic control decreases morbidity and mortality in critically ill patients. However, limited guidance exists regarding the transition from intravenous (IV) to subcutaneous insulin therapy. A validated protocol for transition is necessary since glycemic variability, hyperglycemia, and hypoglycemia adversely impact patient outcomes. METHOD: The objective was to determine the safest and most effective method to transition critically ill adults from IV to subcutaneous insulin. This single-center, retrospective, observational study included adults admitted to the burn, medical, or surgical/trauma intensive care units from January 1, 2011, to September 30, 2014. A computer-based program provided a reflection of the patient's total daily IV insulin requirements. This information was then utilized to stratify patients into groups according to their initial dose of subcutaneous insulin as a percentage of the prior 24-hour IV requirements (group stratification: 0-49%, 50-59%, 60-69%, 70-79%, ≥80%). The primary endpoint was the percentage of blood glucose (BG) concentrations within target range (70-150 mg/dL) 48 hours following transition. RESULTS: One hundred patients with 1394 BG concentrations were included. The 50-59% group achieved the highest rate of BG concentrations in goal range (68%) (P < .001). The 0-49% group, which was the transition method utilized most often, resulted in the lowest rate of goal achievement (46%). CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective study suggests critically ill adults may be safely transitioned to 50-59% of their 24-hour IV insulin requirements. A dosing protocol will be implemented to transition to 50-70% subcutaneous insulin. Follow-up data will be reviewed to assess the protocol's safety and efficacy

High-Alert Medication Stratification Tool—Revised Phase II: A Multisite Study Examining the Validity, Interrater Reliability, and Ease of Use of the High-Alert Medication Stratification Tool—Revised

Objectives The primary objective of this multisite study, High-Alert Medication Stratification Tool—Revised (HAMST-R) phase II, was to assess the content validity of HAMST-R. Secondary outcomes included interrater reliability and ease of use. Methods HAMST-R was designed as an objective tool to evaluate high-alert medications (HAMs) at a single site during HAMST-R Phase I. Medication safety experts from 7 health systems across the United States volunteered to participate in this phase II study. Participants completed a demographic survey, oversaw evaluation of 47 HAMs and 35 non-HAMs using HAMST-R, and submitted scores for each medication evaluated. In addition, participants rated each question of HAMST-R on its relevance to assess a medication’s safety risk, measured as scale-content validity index. Positive and negative predictive values were evaluated in a post hoc analysis. Interrater reliability was evaluated using the Kendall coefficient of concordance (K), and ease of use was assessed using a mixed-methods approach. Results Scale-content validity index was 0.80, indicating that the tool was valid. Positive predictive value was 90.5% (95% confidence interval, 87.2%–93.0%), and negative predictive value was 98.2% (95% confidence interval, 95.4%–99.3%). A score of 4 or more differentiated between HAMs and non-HAMs, confirming phase I findings. K was 0.56, indicating moderate agreement. Participants confirmed that the tool was easy to use and plan to incorporate the tool into HAM policies and procedures, formulary review, and safety strategy implementation. Conclusions HAMST-R is a valid, objective, and easy to use method that institutions may implement to evaluate a medication’s potential safety risk